Mark Lemley writes:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
<< I have always thought it strange that
<< copyright law does not include a right of attribution, with the apparent
<< result that if I can copy something (under, say, the fair use doctrine),
<< I can copy it without attribution. This is plagiarism, but not copyright
<< infringement.&
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
But it might also be unfair competition at common law and a violation
of the Lanham Act. The existence of these "non-copyright" remedies was
one of the factors that allowed Congress not to deal with moral rights
explicitly except for fine arts.
Further thought: why should moral rights be incorporated in a copyright
law at all? They have precious little to do with the subject matter of
copyright.
- Vance R. Koven * phone: 617-482-3852 *
- attorney at law * fax: 617-482-4972 *
- 20 Park Plaza Ste. 520 * net: koven[_at_]umbsky.cc.umb.edu *
- Boston, MA 02116 * *
Received on Sat Dec 03 1994 - 03:36:29 GMT